9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1417X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no basis. - The receipts for the years 2007-08 and 2008-09 were recovered from him in the form of computerized sheets to which there is no denial. - Decided against assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s 76 and 77. 3. The contention of the appellant is that they had deposited ₹ 3,27,787/- before the issue of the show cause notice and the same was appropriated under the order-in-original. They deposited ₹ 98,880/-after the issue of order-in-original. However, this amount as well as 25% of this amount as penalty was deposited within 30 days of the communication of the order in terms o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dered the submissions. The issue to be considered is whether in applying the provisions of Section 78 proviso, the amount of service tax to be considered for calculation of 25% of penalty should exclude the service tax paid before issue of show cause notice. 5. We find that the proviso refers to "Central Excise Officer determining such service tax under sub-section (2) Section 73". We d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of tax (already paid) which is appropriated after the total tax is confirmed. Therefore, the contention of the appellant cannot be accepted. The appellant was aware of the obligations under the Service Tax law because initially he had taken registration from the department but had surrendered the same in April 2008 on the belief that the gross receipts were less than the registration limit. Thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
